One of the things coming up more and more in litigation is the whole concept of litigation funding. While it featured prominently in Hulk Hogan’s suit against Gawker, it’s still something of a novelty in many parts of the country, often arising as an issue of potential controversy, such as in the NFL concussion settlement. There’s still a lot of debate regarding disclosure and transparency, something courts haven’t universally addressed.

Its impact on the business of law is already being felt, however. The Daily Business Review looked at the issue and concluded that boutiques were at risk to suffer the most negative impact from litigation funding. Why? Because they traditionally had an edge on both large firms and midsize firms because of their willingness to take multi-million-dollar cases on the basis of a contingency fee or alternative fee arrangements. The big firms traditionally weren’t willing to depart from their hourly billing rates, and the smaller firms weren’t equipped to handle the potential risk.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]